FT MEADE R EPO R T 

GenCol1 

OF 

Desmond Fitzgerald, 

ON A 

NEW WATER SUPPLY 

FOR THE 

CITY OF BROCKTON, 

Including Information Submitted by 
the City Engineer. 



BROCKTON, MASS. 

Union Printing Company, 158 Main St. 







fhTC 

IGJ 



LIBRARY C r CONGRESS 

J AN 6 1938 

Qtvtsiuw o* oocuwLurs 





! • 




Report of City Engineer submitting Report of Des¬ 
mond Fitzgerald in matter of new 
Water Supply. 


Brockton, Mass., Aug. 12, 1901. 
To the Mayor and City Council. 

Gentlemen: In accordance.with an Order passed by the 
City Council and signed by the Mayor on March 21st, 1901, 
I have secured the services of Mr. Desmond Fitzgerald, of 
Boston, and herewith submit his report together with the 
information submitted to him by myself. 

In addition, I would say that Mr. Fitzgerald is prepared 
to appear before the City Council at such time as they may 
designate, in explanation of his position and for the pur¬ 
pose of answering any questions the Council may desire to 
ask. Yours respectfully, 

CHAS. R. FELTON, 

City Engineer. 






Report of City Engineer. 


Brockton, June 1st, 1901. 

Mr. Desmond Fitzgerald. 

Sir: In accordance with the written request of the 
Water Commissioners of this city, acting under an order 
of the City Council, both of which documents are appended, 
I beg leave to submit the following information. I would 
request that you give it your careful consideration, check¬ 
ing my estimates of the capacities of sources and their cost 
to such a degree as will satisfy you of their general accur¬ 
acy, and commenting freely on such deductions as it has 
been necessary for me to draw in deciding upon what data 
you would require. 

As the probable quantity required is so large a factor in 
our problem, I have entered quite fully into the details of 
our consumption and population; you will observe that I 
have gone more fully into some other details than are 
necessary for your own consideration, that the public may 
understand the basis of your conclusions. 

In addition to the sources I have mentioned, it is desired 
that you should report on the desirability of an attempt to 
secure a ground water source for the city, also as to the 
desirability or possibility of connecting with the Metropol¬ 
itan Water Supply, or any other source not mentioned by 



6 


me to which your attention is drawn by an inspection of 
the State map of this vicinity. 

The estimates which I have given you are based on the 
assumption that the work will be done by city labor, as no 
contracts for work of this character have been let in this, 
city for several years. The city rate of wages for unskilled 
labor is $2.00 for an eight-hour day; this would affect the 
cost of some of the projects much more than others, on 
account of the greater percentage of labor in the total cost.. 
The estimates have all been made on the supposition that 
the basins are to be stripped. In case you should think it 
desirable to leave them unstripped and filter the water, I 
shall ask you to add the cost of a filter plant, with the capi¬ 
talized cost of treating the water for a term of years to the 
estimate, minus the stripping. 

In making an estimate of pumps required and size of 
force mains, it has been necessary for me to compile cer¬ 
tain tables based on our probable ultimate consumption, 
which I have appended, together with a list of plans which 
are at your disposal. As the cost of maintenance of differ¬ 
ent sources enters materially into the question, on account 
of the different heights of pumping, I give also a table 
showing the value of sources at different heights, based on 
the extra cost of coal. 


List of Plans. 

1. Plan of Avon Reservoir (present source). 

2. Plan of Avon Reservoir watershed. 

3. Plan of suggested reservoir below the present dam. 

4. Plan of Beaver Brook Reservoir, elevation 140. 

5. Plan of Beaver Brook Reservoir, elevation 155. 

6. State plan of all watersheds adjacent to Brockton. 

7. Plan of Silver Lake. 



7 


8. Plan of Silver Lake watershed. 

9. Profile of a suggested route to Silver Lake. 

10. Plan of a proposed distributing reservoir and site. 

11. Plan of York Pond. 


Copy of letter from Water Commissioners to City Engineer, 

Brockton, Mass., March 22, 1901. 

At a meeting of the Water Commissioners held March 
21st, it was VOTED: 

That the City Engineer be furnished with a copy of the 
order passed by the City Council for an expert engineer to 
iwestigate an additional source of water supply, and that 
he be, and he is hereby requested, to carry out the provi¬ 
sions of said order, and to place in the hands of this Board, 
all bills for expense incurred under said order, duly ap¬ 
proved by him. 


F. B. GARDNER, 


Clerk. 





Copy of Order Relating to Water Supply Investigation 


ORDERED: That the Water Commissioners be and 
they are hereby directed to request the City Engineer to 
select and employ an expert hydraulic engineer, not com¬ 
mitted to any of the sources of additional water supply pro¬ 
posed for this city, who shall carefully examine the various 
possible and available sources of such supply and shall 
make report to the City Engineer recommending the one 
best adapted, in his judgment, to serve the city’s present 
and future needs, with his reasons therefor, and the City 
Engineer shall report the same to the City Council: and 
the Water Commissioners are hereby further directed to 
require the City Engineer to furnish said expert engineer 
with all surveys made and information already obtained in 
connection with the selection of a new source of water sup¬ 
ply, and to make such further surveys and obtain such 
further information for such purpose as he may deem nec¬ 
essary or as shall be required by said expert engineer. And 
the said Commissioners are hereby authorized to pay all 
expenses hereunder incurred from the “Construction Ac¬ 
count” of the Water Department, not however to exceed 
the sum of two thousand dollars. 

Read twice and passed in concurrence: said order ap¬ 
proved by the Mayor March 20, 1901. 



10 


General Statistics of Brockton, Plymouth Co., Mass. 


20 miles 
21.56 sq. “ 
5.9 
5-5 


. 240 

. 70 
. 106.7 
. 22.74 

. 65.41 


5275 


feet 


miles 


Distance from Boston .... 

Area ....... 

Greatest length, North and South . 

Greatest length, East and West 
Highest elevation above city base (base 
probably about mean low water) 

Lowest elevation above city base 
Accepted streets, year 1900 . 

Sewers, 1900 .... 

Water mains, 1900 . , 

Number of connections with sewers, year 

1900.959 

Number of connections with water mains 
year 1900 ..... 

Number of connections with water mains, 
metered, per cent. . . ' 

Water consumption per capita, 1900 
Water consumption per consumer (esti¬ 
mated), ..... 

Maximum daily consumption during larg¬ 
est month .... 1,591,000 “ 

Maximum daily consumption for one day 2,308,000 “ 

Population, 1900 ...... 40,063 

Taxable valuation, 1900 . . . $27,868,799.20 

Tax rate, 1900 ...... 20.10 

Death rate per 1000, 1900 .... 13.08 

Principal industry, shoe manufacturing, 


81.4 

29.3 

33-3 


gallons 


pairs per annum 


. 11,000,000 


11 


Table Showing Annual Cost of Coal for Pumping 
1,000,000 GALLONS OF WATER DAILY TO A HEIGHT OF 
100 FEET, WITH COAL AT $5.00 PER TON (2000 lbs.) THIS 
TABLE GIVES SUMS, THE INTEREST OF WHICH AT %% PER 
CENT. REPRESENTS THE SAVING EFFECTED BY PUMPS OF 
SUPERIOR ECONOMY OVER AN INFERIOR ONE, ASSUMING 
THE LIFE OF THE ENGINE AT 25 YEARS, AND ESTAB¬ 
LISHING A SINKING FUND AT PER CENT. INTEREST 

TO RETIRE THE FIRST COST OF PUMPS AT THAT TIME. 

The table may be used in direct proportion for 

OTHER HEIGHTS, FOR OTHER CONSUMPTIONS, OR FOR 
OTHER PRICES OF COAL. 


Higher duty, in million foot pounds per 100 pounds of coal. 


Lower Duty. 

Yearly cost 
of coal. 

150 

140 

130 

# 

120 

llO 

i . 

IOO 

90 

SO 

70 

60 

50 

SO 

60 

70 

SO 

90 

ioo 

no 

120 

130 

140 

150 

$1533 

1277 

1095 

958 

852 

766 

697 

639 

589 

547 

511 

17033 

12786 

9733 

7450 

5683 

f 00 > 

A250 

2133 

1300 

600 

16433 

12166 

9133 

6850 

5083 

3650 

2500 

1533 

700 

15733 

11466 

8433 

6150 

4383 

2950 

1800 

833 

14900 

10633 

7600 

5317 

3550 

2117 

967 

13933 

9666 

6633 

4350 

2583 

1150 

12783 

8516 

5483 

3200 

1433 

11350 

7083 

4050 

1767 

9583 

5316 

2283 

7300 

3033 

4266 



• ••••• 

•••••» 


















































< 












Select the column headed by the higher duty. Then 
select the line beginning with the lower duty. The sum 
found at the intersection of the column and line is that 
which, under the above conditions, could be paid for the 
higher duty engine above the price of the lower duty~ 


engine. 









































12 


future Tima to which it would seem Wise and Reasonable 
to Attempt to Provide under our Circumstances. 

I have assumed that it will be unnecessary to attempt to 
determine details for any period beyond 1930. Of course, 
if a larger source of supply can be obtained at the same 
•cost, pther things being equal, that one should be selected, 
but the possibility of our expectations as to population and 
consumption not being realized, and the consequent as¬ 
sumption of a needless debt, would seem to indicate 1930 
as the extreme period for which it would be wise to expend 
any large sum of money for quantity, and in the matter of 
accessories, such as pumps, mains, etc., it is obvious that 
anything which will economically *do our work at this time 
must certainly be inadequate before the source is ex¬ 
hausted, and so long a period is a matter of some doubt. 

The bonds now being issued by the city bear interest at 
the rate of 3*4 per cent., and $100,000 expended now would 
amount at that rate, to 

$280,000 in 30 years. 

395,000 in 40 years. 

558,000 in 50 years. 

788,000 in 60 years. 

Population, 

The following figures and chart show the growth of 
Brockton by five-year periods since 1870 to the present 
time, and the predicted future growth, with a comparison 
with other Massachusetts cities after reaching the size of 
Brockton. I would add that the present industrial indica¬ 
tions in Brockton seem to point to a material increase for 
the first period. 



1310 

1320 

I330i 

13405 

1350 * 












































































14 


Per cent, of 

Year. Population. Increase for periods of ft years 


1870. 
1875, 
1880 
■ 1885 

1890 
1895. 
1900. 

1905 

I 9 I ° 

I 9 I 5 

1920 

1925 

1930 


8,007. 27 

10,578. 32 • 

13,608.. —.... .30 

.20,783 ........53 

27.294.—.31 

33,165. .22 

40,063. -..... —21 


Actual 

growth. 


47,800. 

. ■••19 

57,000. 

*. 19 

67,300. 

..18 

79,200 .. . . 

.18 

91,600. 

........f6 

105,000. 

. -15 


Predicted 

growth 


I give also an estimate of the probable future growth of 
Whitman, bearing in mind, however, the added danger of 
a small town’s susceptibility to stagnation before reaching a 
solid basis. 


Population of Whitman. 


Year. 

1900... 

Population. 

. 6,1 . .. . 

Per cent, of 

Increase for periods of 5 years 

1905*.. 

. 7,200. .. 

. 17 

1910*.. 

. 8,700... 


1915*.. 

.10,700. .. 

.23 

1920*.. 

.13,200. .. 

.23 

1925*.. 

.16,200. .. 

. ••••23 

1930*.. 

.20,000. . . 

. 2 3 


* Predicted growth. 












































15 


Consumption of Water, 

The following table shows the consumption of water in 
Brockton since 1892, which was the first year that records 
were available, the pumping plant being installed at that 
time. 


Year. 

Population. 

Total 

Consumption 

Consumption 
In gallons 
per capita 

Domestic use in 

gal’s per capita. 

Manuf’cturing, 

in gallons. 

Street Sprink¬ 

ling in gallons. 

Fountains in 

gallons. 

Unaccounted 

for in gallons, 

Metered 

Un- 

Metered 

1892 

29,643 

271,652,000 

25,0 






* 

1893 

30,817 

264,409,000 

23.5 







1894 

31,993 

323,201,000 

27.7 

6.7 

3.8 





1895 

33,165 

399.694,000 

33.0 

7.3 

3.2 

2.4 

1 .8' 

1.5 

16.8 

1896 

34,544 

403,882,000 

32.0 

9.2 

3.3 

3.2 

2.2 

1.4 

12.7 

1897 

35,923 

386,428,000 

29.5 

8.5 

2.6 

4.0 

2.8 

1.4 

10.2 

1898 

37,302 

369,370,000 

27.1 

10.3 

28 

2.7 

2.2 

1.3 

7.8 

1899 

38,681 

414,737,000 

29.4 

11.0 

2.7 

3.6 

2.6 

13 

8.2 

1900 

40,063 

429,002,000 

29.3 

10.9 

2.5 

4.0 

2.5 

1.3 

8.1 


*This amount includes the water used for fires, flushing 
sewers and water mains, and puddling trenches. 

The total use of spring water for the city, as near as can 
be ascertained, is about 1,850,000 gallons per year, or about 
1/10 gallon per capita per day. 

The total consumption and consumption per capita differ 
slightly from those given in the water Commissioners’ re¬ 
port, the former on account of their year ending with the 
month of November, and the latter on account of the revi¬ 
sion of population after the census. 

It will be noted that there has been no increase per capita 
in the last six years; that the amounts per capita for street 
sprinkling and fountains have remained substantially the 

















16 


same; that the total domestic consumption has increased 
about 3.5 gallons per capita, the manufacturing consump¬ 
tion 1.6 gallons, and the amount unaccounted for has de¬ 
creased 8.7 gallons per capita. The amount of unmetered 
consumption was assumed to be the same per connection 
as those metered; the street sprinkling water is measured, 
and the fountains were measured this year. To prove that 
this tabulation is substantially correct, I have had meas¬ 
urements taken of the lowering of the standpipe, and after 
allowing for the fountains I find the actual rate of use be¬ 
tween the hours of one and five o’clock A. M. to be 8.9 
gallons per capita, in comparison with the 8.1 gallons of the 
table under “Unaccounted for,” which seems to show that 
the water unaccounted for is due almost entirely to leakage 
in the pipes or unmetered connections, as the actual use 
must then be very slight. 

The gradual diminution in the amount unaccounted for 
is probably due to the increased percentage of metered 
connections, which has risen from 70 per cent, in 1895 to 
81 per cent, in 1900. The increase in domestic consump¬ 
tion is probably due largely to the installation of modern 
plumbing incident to the construction of the sewerage sys¬ 
tem in 1893. As there are only about 1,000 connections 
with the sewers, as against over 5,275 with the water mains, 
I anticipate that considerable of the increase in consump¬ 
tion will be in this item, but that it will be in a measure 
nullified by a decreasing percentage of unmetered connec¬ 
tions. For the above reasons, I have not figured on the 
necessity of such large amounts of water as is usually 
thought advisable, believing that the provision of such ex¬ 
tended works as would be required to furnish these large 
amounts of water would be unwise and unwarranted by the 
facts in our particular case. I would draw your attention to 


17 


the fact that Fall River, with a population of 104,000, has 
never used as high as 40 gallons per capita since 1882, and 
has averaged nearer 30 gallons than 40 since that time, and 
that the consumption ol water in Providence, with a popu¬ 
lation of 175,000, is only 54 gallons per capita. As it is 
estimated that about 14 per cent, of our population is not 
supplied, a slight increase may be expected for this reason. 
Under the circumstances I have adopted the following 
amounts as conservative and reasonable, making the in¬ 
crease in the next five years somewhat greater than for 
corresponding periods beyond that time, on account of the 
probable more rapid increase of mileage at this time and a 
possible slight increase of pressure, believing that a greater 
use of water will be extravagant and unnecessary. 


Year 

GuIIods per capita 

1900. 


1905 . 


1910. 


1915 . 


1920. 


1925 . 


1930. 



The monthly ratio of consumption in Brockton for the 
past nine years has been as follows: 









18 


TABLE SHOWING RATIO OF EACH MONTH TO THE 
AVERAGE MONTHLY CONSUMPTION. 



Jan . 

Feb . 

Mar . 

Apr . 

May . 

June . 

July 

Aug . 

Sept . 1 Oct . 
1 

^Nov 

Dec 

1892 

.94 

.90 

.96 

.96 

.96 

1.17 

1.49 

1 27 

.92 

.84 

.78 

.81 

1893 

.95 

.80 

.85 

.76 

.91 

1.37 

1.53 

1.21 

.98 

.92 

.84 

.87 

1894 

.73 

.70 

.77 

.73 

1.03 

1.28 

1.52 

1.27 

1.10 

.98 

.89 

1.02 

1895 

.87 

86 

.94 

.94 

1 18 

1.55 

1.40 

1.11 

.87 

.79 

.69 

.79 

1896 

.85 

.81 

.86 

.90 

1.16 

1.16 

1.18 

1.23 

1 00 

1.00 

.91 

.95 

1897 

1.04 

1,05 

.98 

.96 

1.02 

1.01 

1.11 

1.00 

1.06 

.98 

.88 

.82 

1898 

.89 

.79 

.85 

.79 

1.06 

1 13 

1.27 

1.25 

1.11 

1.00 

.89 

.97 

1899 

.88 

.85 

.89 

.91 

1.11 

1.41 

1.22 

1.19 

.94 

.89 

.84 

.85 

1900 

.89 

.90 

.86 

.86 

1.11 

1.10 

1.38 

1.14 

1.08 

..91 

.84 

.92 

Av’ge 

.89 

.85 

.89 

.87 

1.06 

1.24 

1.34 

1.20 

1.01 

.92 

.84 

.89 


In my calculations for capacities of sources I have as¬ 
sumed the ratio of the year 1894, whose departure from 
the normal, is not enough to warrant the belief that any 
abnormal conditions existed at that time which might not 
be duplicated or even exceeded in a dry year. The rainfall 
conditions prevailing that year and since that time are 
shown by the following'table of rainfall. 






















® Avenge cf other slztion?. 








o 

p 


o o 

O <; 

2 o 

3 3 


A -a A .jr a >> ^ > cr *'3 
o* 2 " -'A c w 

3 3 - 

a 


3 

o 

s 

Er 


Co 

S? 

A, 

co 

C-> 4 k C\ 10 *■< M Ow W -9 10 »0 

w co ►-. co to 0 O'co -;» co bo A 

4 * ‘4 00 Ci O' CO CO K> '..n -f. 0000 

City Hall. 


Ci 

e\ 
4^ • 

CnAe'WOUHUOwCow 

• « mu 'O VO Ci {0 CO to Co q oa 
to h HW 00 O'Ci to 'O O'? O *4 

Filter Beds. 

1 ° 

f- 

Oj 

<41 

<0 ■$* -y- 

4 A Ca> Ovoo NhQ(/JWhWW 

*^5 NO O bo ^AO On <0 Co vb ^4 
NO <4 ON to ih f-« **4 u h U 

Pumping Sta. 


4 * 

Oi 

bi 

to 

to '-.-t c> 40. co 4 k co to 40. co 0 co 

Cl Cl O' Cl C»Cl CO Cl A *-< A 
v 3 -f"JU m^w 0 C?\ 

City Hall. 


*§N 

-A 

v*> 

ts) '4 O\G0 Co Ci w to Cl CO HU 

A ci b o b b A b'A m -b A 

Cl CA' '1 (70 Ot'l c\ 0 4 >- Cl ~4 

Filter Beds. 

I 5 

1st 

4% 

90 

60 

Co CO A-fs Co 4k to to Ci to Oco 

0 b ci O'A11 ci A A co vb coA 
<1 VO Cl to O i Cl 0 0 CVci -ft O 

Pumping Sta. 


(.*0 

Ov 

On 

to 

U^WlJtNwC^WMtnWH 

b b co io m ci ci Aj m AAA 
OCO to Ov>- ‘tto'OO 00 COvO 

City Hall. 


Oo 

On 

C* 

VO 

to Co to to h cj to 4k 00 .to 

b \c A io b A A iovo A 60 - 
0 to^jCicoCosO 9-1-4 Co 0 4t 

Filter Beds.. 

M 

cc 

£ 

4 ^ 

6 

H-« 

to -fk Co CO to 9-9 CO to M(ot 4 t 9 — 

bAAbioAAiob AA co 

Oi^r ci 0 ooci 6 004 - co-ot -fk 

Pumping Sta. 


4 - 

O 

A 

00 

Co O' _ MO0 4'O'4i.O0 to toco 

A <-• O'li 00 ci A A b A <5 « 

Oil© O 0"0 'Of Ct HSCJ GO 00 

City Hall. 


Co 

0 

CO 

CO 

Co O' H+.OkOtO'tOtiHjO 

A 9-9 A A to A bo’^'bCi coA 

-O'OOhOi^W OQO to Co OCo 

Filter Beds. 

£ 

•A 

9 

Co O' «4i.toci4'Cotototo 

60 CO O'CO O'CO O to io Ci 9-9 00 
to Co HUi'OO'CJ t» CO to -4 ft 

Pumping Sta. 


<-n 

to 

-U 

00 

»-» On ^4 *-< QNC-n ►-* 4 ^ Cn to 4^. 

'P to ^4 vip ^4 vb bo Q l* 0 bo bo 

Oo NO *4 OO An On Art vo Aa 0 

City Hall. 


0\ 

»H 

^4 

to Ci 00 h O' O' >-< Co Ci >1 -ft. CO 

b O' b A A ci A boA b bo 

'-I Cl OOU to CT "5 Ci Ob 

Filter Beds. 

M 

00 

t-n 

Oo 

bo 

<-n 

tJCi<t to O' O' « Co Cl to OiCo 

A 'j A) A b"b b A b b b h 

00 Ci k)ON HMV JHi£)HO 0 

Pumping Sta. 


t 

Co 

H 

w to tJlO to w w Cl Co 4^ 

b b « A A A co A io A io bo 

Cl O'^l ONO-to CO to -ft. MD O' O' 

City Hall. 


4* 

*-» 

Oi 

M M W O Mf>U H H O'CJ -fo 

AAAbiooobAioAiobo 

to -to m'B'.o'O to -k Co -o to^a 

Filter Beds. 

f 

4 * 

to 

Oo 

M M MtO O^ (f M H CT'CO 4k 

ci A Avb to b A A A A io\b 
0 >OOtotoCoOOCOtotJCOO 

Pumping Sta. 


t 

Cn 

O 

to -ft. c>0 -ft >0 to Cl Cl to CO Cl co 

90 wA'oi'Ji'O'f AmM 90 so 

■- CO GO Ci 4 kCiv© 4 >t OCo to 90 

City Hall. 


-ft 

Cl 

vb 

M 

1 

to -fk Co -ft to to Ci -jk 9o4t O' Co | 

b'Ai-A ioA b'oAA i-'b 

0 -ft tO •<! to 0 4 0 "O 'O O' Cl 1 

Filter Beds. 

i 

p 

O' 

8 

tO-fkCO-fk 90 Co -ft Cl to-fk OlA 

A 'b A qp ►< b A O' A ci A « 

COO 4“ 0 00 to to 90 VO OOCO to 

Pumping Sta. 


to 

►h 

to 

t 04 k- 4 -f^ to Co Co Co to .Co Co Co 

b"b oAbA oAvbA io A 

00 O' Cl CO '-4 to to Co to to to to 

City Hall. 

s 

rt 

ft) 

4 ^ 

to 

S 

to 4t 4k -ft toco toco to CO CO Co 

cc'-t io ci A bo-b A\b A A A 
C'VO to -O -p 00^1 90 O' 00 OC 0 

Filter Beds. 

00 

0 

43-99 

to Ci 4 -ft to Co Co Co to CO Co Cf 

(zooi'b'C A 0 Avb O'A A 

O' O' 0"0 OOUo 0 4 - -ft Cl Co Cl 

Pumping Sta. 

M 

-8 


S 3 

> 

Z 


T» 

> 


r* 

r- 

SI 


O 


S 3 


•< 

m 

> 

S 3 


0 ) 


? 



Z 

n 

r* 

c 

C D 

< 

m 


f 





























































































20 


Future Requirements. 

Using the population as shown by the chart, and the rate 
per capita as decided upon, I have calculated the total prob¬ 
able requirements of the city to 1930, and as Whitman 
must be supplied in case we adopt the Silver Lake project 
I have figured also the combined consumption of the two 
places assuming Whitman’s consumption to be at the same 
rate, which is very conservative, as the present consump¬ 
tion is only 21 gallons per capita. 

TABLE SHOWING ESTIMATED FUTURE POPULA¬ 
TION AND CONSUMPTION OF BROCKTON. 

Consumption per Total Consump- 
Year. Population. Inhabitant, in tion per day, 

gallons daily. in gallons. 

I9°5.47.8 oo. 35.1,673,000 

1910. 57,ooo.37.2,109,000 

i9 J 5.67,300.39.2,624,700 

1920. 79,200.41.3,247,200 

J 9 2 5. 9 L 6 oo .43. 3,938,800 

1930.105,000.45. 

4-/] S.'S j 0 * a 

TABLE SHOWING ESTIMATED FUTURE POPULA¬ 
TION AND CONSUMPTION OF BROCKTON AND 
WHITMAN COMBINED. 


Year. 

I905... 

7 Q10. . . 

Population. 

1 

.55,000 - 

... 65,700.... 

Consumption per 
Inhabitant, in 
gallons daily. 

. X 7 . 

Total consump. 
tion per day, 
in gallons. 

1915... 

... 78,000_ 

. 39 . 

. .3,042,000 

1920... 

... 92,400_ 



1925... 

... 107,800.... 

. 43 . 

• *4,635,400 

1930... 

... 125,000.... 

. 45 . 





































21 


Present Source and its Adequacy. 

The present source of Brockton’s water supply is an 
-■artificial reservoir in the town of Avon. This reservoir was 
not stripped of its loam and roots. 

The watershed of the reservoir, including water surface, 
is 3.25 square miles. The water surface at elevation 204.2, 
which is the permanent height of the flash boards at the 
roll way, has an area of 88 acres. It is the custom, how¬ 
ever, to raise this level twelve inches by extra flash boards, 
giving an area of approximately 92 acres. 

The following table shows the area and capacity of the 
Teservoir for each succeeding foot below this point (ele. 
.205.2) which I have assumed to be the highest point to 
which it is advisable to raise the water, for reasons wliich 
will be given later. The population on the watershed is 
estimated at about 300, or 90 to the square mile. 


Table Showing Capacity of Reservoir: 


Reservoir at elevation 205.2 (high water) 309,290.744 gallons. 


1 foot below high water 204.2. 279,914,997 

2 “ “ *• “ 203.2.251,424.664 

3 “ “ “ “ 202.2.228,992.818 

4 “ “ “ “ 201.2.197,483,332 

5 “ •* “ “ 200.2.172,194,267 

6 “ “ « “ 199.2.148,307,879 

7 “ “ “ 198.2.125,968,234 

8 “ “ “ 197.2.105,150,848 

9 “ “ “ “ 196 2. 85,858,013 

10 “ “ “ “ 195 2. 68,144,468 

11 “ “ “ “ 194.2. 51,906,929 

12 “ “ “ “ 193.2. 37,072,900 

13 “ “ “ “ 192.2. 23.843,742 

14 ft.=6in.below top of pipe 191.2. 12,569,019 


The following table shows what would occur in a dry 
year on this watershed, using the Sudbury River rainfall 
;and collection of 1880, with an average consumption of 
1,500,000 gallons per day, monthly ratio of 1894. 
























22 


TABLE SHOWING WHAT WOULD OCCUR AT BROCK¬ 
TON RESERVOIR, WITH 12-TNCH BOARDS ON, IN 
A DRY YEAR SIMILAR TO 1880, WITH A CON¬ 
SUMPTION OF 1,500,000 GALLONS DAILY AVER¬ 
AGE, USING THE MONTHLY RATIO OF CON¬ 
SUMPTION OF 1894: 


MONTH. 

January, 

February, 

March, 

April, 

May, 

June, 

July, 

August, 

September, 

October, 

November 

December, 


Amount 

collectable, 

113,679,670 

168,176,253 

137,630,433 

112,444,474 

48,330,402 

12,563,957 

17,229,827 

9,823.871 

5,307,101 

10,211,213 

19.555,810 

17,626,729 


Amount 

consumed 

33.123,0241 
31,754,304 | 

34.993.608 j- 
33,396,768 | 
46,855,848 J 
58,307,472 
69,120,360 
58,054 976 

50.186.400 

44.483.400 
40,742,232 

46.399.608 


Total amount 
withdrawn in 
excess of 
amt.collected 

Water 

casting 

45,473,515 

97,634,048 

145,865,153 

190,744,452 

225,016.639 

246,203,061 

274,975,940 


Depth below 
top of 12-inch 
boards.*, 


1.6 
35 
5.4 
7.3 
9 1 
10 3 
12.2 


♦Elevation 205.2. 


Ratios of monthly consumption for the year 1894, as s h° wn 
by the pumping records, of the Brockton Water-Works. 
Unity—average month=i-i2 yearly consumption :—January, 
.73; February, .70; March, .77; April, .73; May, 1.03; 
June, 1.28; July, 1.52; August, 1.27; September, i.lo; 
October, .98; Nevember, .89; December, 1 02. 

As a test of the applicability of the Sudbury River rec¬ 
ords to our watershed, I have used the Sudbury River 
records of collection with our rainfall for 1899, and find for 
that year that the theoretical fall of the water would have 
been somewhat less than actually happened, it being then 
82 inches below the rollwav (204.2), the 12 inch boards not 
having been added; the next year it fell 72 inches below the 
same point with 12 inches added, or a total of 84 inches be¬ 
low 205.2. From these figures I am led to conclude that 
an average draught of 1,500,000 gallons per day with our 


23 


ratio of consumption would completely exhaust our reser¬ 
voir in a dry year, and that this consumption may be 
reached in two years, and will probably be in four years. 

The following- table shows the theoretical fall of the 
water in the reservoir in a dry year, with present con¬ 
sumption. The actual fall in 1900 (not a dry year—see 
table) was 84 inches. 

table showing what would occur during a 

DRY YEAR LIKE 1880 , IN THE BROCKTON RES¬ 
ERVOIR, WITH A CONSUMPTION OF 1,200000 GAL¬ 
LONS (present consumption) DAILY AVERAGE. THE 
MONTHLY RATIOS OF CONSUMPTION AS SHOWN 
BY THE PUMPING RECORDS OF 1894 , WERE 
USED —12-INCH BOARDS ON: 



Amount 

Amount 

Total amount 
withdrawn in 

Amount Reser¬ 
voir lowered 

MOXTH. 

collectable. 

consumed 

excess of amt 
collected. 

below high wa¬ 
ter = 12 inches 

J a n 11 ajy, 
February, 

113 697,870 

26 , 498,4201 

436 . 062,392 

.above rollway 

168,176 253 

25 , 403.440 | 

gallons 


March, 

137 , 630.433 

27 . 994,890 }■ 

would run 


April, 

112 . 444.474 

26 , 717,410 | 

to waste 


May, 

June, 

4 K. 330 , 4 u 2 

12 . 563,957 

37 , 584,680 J 
46 , 645.980 

34 , 082,023 

1.2 ft. 

July, 

17.225 482 

55 . 296,290 

72 . 152.831 

2.5 

August, 

9 , 597,614 

46499,980 

109 , 055,197 

39 

September, 

4,834 433 

40 , 149.120 

144,369 884 

5.3 

October, 

November, 

10 , 234,674 

35 , 586.720 

169 . 721,939 

6.6 

19 , 288,370 

82 . 593,790 

183 , 027,350 

7.0 

December, 

18 , 121,988 

37 , 119,690 

202 , 025,052 

7.9 


I have considered it inexpedient to attempt to raise the 
water above elevation 205.2, not only because of the tem¬ 
porary nature of the expedient and because the dam was 
not designed for storage above that point, but, more par¬ 
ticularly, because if raised eighteen inches higher, which 
would be the extreme limit of safety (see sketch of present 
dam) it would flow from fifty to seventy-five acres of 



24 


grassy meadow land to a depth of from six inches to a foot. 

The following table gives average analyses of this water 
for the past thirteen years, as given by the State Board of 
Health. 

CHEMICAL EXAMINATION OF WATER FROM SALIS¬ 
BURY BROOK STORAGE RESERVOIR AS MADE 
BY THE STATE BOARD OF HEALTH. YEARLY 
AVERAGES. 


Year. 

Color. 

Residue 
on Evapo¬ 
ration. 

Ammonia. 

Chlorine. 

Nitrogen. 

as 

Oxygen 

Cousumed. 

Hardness. 

Free. 

Albuminoid, 

Nitrates. 

Nitrites. 

Total. 

Loss on 
Ignition, 

Total. 

DlSr 

Solved 

Sus¬ 

pended 

1888 

.76 

3.76 

1.61 

.0031 

.0369 



,31 

.0066 

.0001 



1889 

.78 

2.79 

1.01 

.0028 

.0306 

.0218 

.0088 

.30 

.0048 

.0002 



1890 

.75 

4.07 

1 98 

.0016 

.0274 

.0219 

.0055 

.32 

.0063 

.0001 


.9 

1891 

.62 

3.15 

1.45 

.0010 

.0213 

.0169 

.0044 

.28 

.0001 

.0001 


.6 

1892 

.55 

3.41 

1.37 

.0004 

.0213 

.0168 

.0045 

.36 

.0030 

.0000 


.7 

1893 

.67 

3.59 

1.70 

.0007 

.0237 

.0196 

.0041 

.40 

.0019 

.0001 

.65 

.7 

1894 

.81 

3.71 

1.63 

.0012 

.0228 

.0188 

.0040 

.44 

.0021 

.0000 

.66 

.7 

1895 

.80 

3.75 

1.86 

.0009 

.0263 

.0224 

.0039 

.43 

.0018 

.0000 

.74 

.9 

1896 

.64 

3.59 

1.55 

.0007 

.0224 

.0186 

.0038 

.38 

0022 

.0000 

.66 

.6 

1897 

.85 

3 80 

1.72 

.0011 

.0236 

.0195 

.0041 

.44 

.0020 

.0000 

,75 

.8 

1898 

.73 

3.72 

1.92 

.0009 

.0237 

.0207 

.0030 

.37 

.0012 

.0000 

.79 

.8 

1899 

.48 

3.24 

1.40 

.0007 

.0226 

.0187 

.0039 

.31 

.0015 

.0000 

.58 

.5 

1900 

.57 

3.72 

1.58 

.0013 

.0239 

.0195 

.0044 

.34 

,0012 

.oooo 

.69 

.5 

























SOUTH ST. 




3 


CA 


XA 


3 - 

i4- 


=+l 



















26 


Upon a preliminary investigation of the various water 
surfaces and watersheds in this vicinity three sources seem 
to stand out prominently for consideration; consequently 
1 have given my first attention to these, and other sources 
have been compared with them in regard to quantity, qual¬ 
ity and cost. If an obvious inequality has been apparent 
without extended investigation, no further consideration 
has been accorded them. 

The three sources which seemed to promise most at first 
were: 

First,—additions to the present source, either by in¬ 
creased watershed or storage, on account of its nearness to 
the city and the location of the present pumping plant, 
which could be used without alteration or addition. 

Second,:—Beaver Brook, on account of the increased 
watershed and its nearness to the city. 

Third,—Silver Lake, on account of its great storage and 
the excellent quality of the water, without any cost for 
preparation of the basin. 

While a storage reservoir costing $100,000, as has been 
proposed, may be an economical measure for increasing 
our pressuie, for maintaining a uniform pressure, and an 
extra precautionary measure in case of our being shut off 
from our supply for a number of days; also furnishing a 
low pressure supply to points not now supplied, there is no 
particular reason why it is not equally applicable to any of 
the three prominent projects, or any other. I have, there¬ 
fore, disregarded it in my comparison of cost for the selec¬ 
tion of a source, and its cost may be added if necessary to 
whatever source is adopted. ' * 

All water now used by the city is pumped into a stand¬ 
pipe 62 feet in diameter and 59.35 feet high. The elevation 
of the top of the standpipe is 252.85 and the pumping plant 


27 


consists of a 3,000,000 gallon Worthington and a 5,000,000 
Holly. It will be necessary to pump any source below ele¬ 
vation 253. 

Additional Storage on Present-Watershed. 

While it seems obvious to me that the absolute limit of 
our present source will be reached shortly, it is apparent 
that it is due not to lack of watershed but to lack of stor¬ 
age, as, basing our collection on the Sudbury River, the 
water which would go to waste in a year like 1880 would be 
400,000,000 gallons, and in an. average year would amount 
to 730,000,000 gallons. 

I have considered four methods of securing this storage: 
1st, by a new dam at Pond Street; 2d, by a dam at the loca¬ 
tion of the present dam, to be built in conjunction with the 
existing structure; 3d, by a dam below the present one, 
crossing the valley near the present pumping station; 4th, 
by the addition of York Pond. 

The topography of the country north of the present 
reservoir is as follows: just north of the reservoir lie about 
50 acres of cleared meadow land, upon which the mud will 
average about 3 feet in depth, and whose elevation is be¬ 
tween 205 and 206; adjoining the cleared meadow is about 
50 acres which is not cleared, and whose, elevation runs 
from 206 to 210; beyond this and across the Taunton turn¬ 
pike (elevation 214.0) is a large area of meadow whose 
average elevation is 212. The highest point of the water¬ 
shed is about 220, and as any height which is practicable 
on this watershed would flow this section to a very shallow 
depth, resulting in almost worthless storage and poor 
water, I have assumed that elevation 211 is the greatest 
practicable height of flowage. This would result in the 
flooding of about 200 acres in addition to the present reser- 


28 


-voir to an average depth of 6 feet, with a maximum depth 
-of io feet, assuming that all the mud was removed from the 
meadows. 

Lam at Pond Street. 

The only advantage to be secured by building a dam at 
Pond Street over raising the present structure would be 
the gain in the cost due to the decreased height of the dam, 
bust we should lose the storage in the present reservoir of 
220,000,000 gallons, and the saving effected would not com¬ 
pensate for this loss. By raising the present dam to eleva¬ 
tion 211, we should have a storage capacity of 930,000,000 
gallons with no increase of watershed and a capacity in a 
dry year of 2,500,000 gallons per day by drawing the reser¬ 
voir to the top of the present outlet pipe. My estimate of 
the cost of this project is higher for less water than for a 
basin below the present dam. 


i Present ^nwnu/ 

on 

Salisbury Brook. 



proposed loc^rHon 


Proposed Dam 


Total Water surface 38 Acres. Total Watershed 3.96 % I 


30 


Basin Belcw the Present Bam. 

What seems to be a better project than either of those 
mentioned above, is the construction of a dam below the 
existing reservoir. At a point about 3,000 feet south of the 
present dam another could be built to flow the water to the 
same height, viz., 205.2. By this dam, about 3,500 feet in 
length, an increased watershed of 0.46 square mile would 
be secured, and a reservoir 205 acres in area, with a storage 
capacity of 800,000,000 gallons would be formed. This 
reservoir, in connection with the other, would give a water¬ 
shed of 3.96 square miles, a water surface of about 298 
acres, an available storage capacity of 890,000,000 gallons, 
and would be capable of furnishing 2,800,000 gallons a day 
in a dry year such as 1882-3, if the reservoir should be 
drawn to the top of the outlet pipe; or to consider that it 
should never be drawn down over 9 feet, 2,500,000 gallons 
per day. The maximum depth in this reservoir would be 
about 21 feet, and the average depth about 11 feet. The 
population on this watershed is estimated at about 310. 
No new pump would be required. My estimate of this 
project is $406,000. 

Following is a table showing what would occur in this 
watershed in a season such as 1882-3, with a consumption 
of 2,800,000 gallons, with a ratio of consumption equal to 
1894. 


31 


TABLE SHOWING EFFECT OF AN AVERAGE DAILY 
CONSUMPTION OF 2,800,000 GALLONS UPON SALIS¬ 
BURY BROOK COMBINED RESERVOIRS IN A DRY 
PERIOD SIMILAR TO 1882-1883; WITH THE 1894-1895 
CONSUMPTION RATIOS: 


MONTH. 

Gallons 

collected. 

Gallons lost by- 

evaporation. 

Gallons 

consumed. 

Total deficit 
at end of 
month. 

June. 

32,284,769 


108,840,614 

76,655,845 

July. .*. 


20,117,885 

16,233,625 

129,195,002 

108,159,296 

225,868,732 

350,261,653 

August.... 

. 

September 

54,057,808 


93,786,445 

389,970,700 

October.... 

26,728,127 


82,950,515 

446,193,178 

November 

17,350,782 

' 

76,052,186 

504,894,612 

December. 

40,562,687 


86,868,096 

551,200,021 

January... 

47,646,414 


73,752,717 

577,300,324 

February... 

121,037,481 


73,667,552 

529,936,445 

March, 

184,933,659 


80,140,077 

425,142,863 

April. 

145,780,880 


80,054.912 

359,416,895 

May. 

108,565,253 


100,579,629 

351,431,271 

June .... 

J ill v. 

17,618;617 

5,355,429 

18,602,948 

131,920,275 

119,401,050 

94,703,258 

465,732,929 

590,489,408 

August.... 


703,695,614 

Septembei 

251,393 


74,263,706 

777,701,927 

October. .. 

28,274,931 


67,365,357 

816,792,353 

November. 

22,051,466 


59.104,371 

853 845,2£8 

December. 

27,806,750 


67,024,698 

893,063.206 























/7o’sfneS-/e 



I 



Total Water - surface 163 Acres. Total Watershed 80 Acres. 







33 


York Pond, 

York Pond lies about two and a half miles northerly 
from the north end of the present reservoir. It is n feet 
higher than the permanent rollway of the existing dam. 
Its area at this elevation is 16.3 acres. From soundings of 
my own I find depths of 23 feet, and there are spots which 
are said to be 30 feet, but if so it is immaterial, as it could 
not be drained into the reservoir from that depth, and I 
have considered it inexpedient to drain it to a depth below 
14 feet, as that depth would be 5 feet below high water in 
the present reservoir, the conduit would have to extend a 
considerable distance into it, and the amount of storage 
below that point would be insignificant. The storage to 
this point would be less than 60 , 000,000 gallons. The total 
watershed is 80 acres. An addition of 80 acres to our pres¬ 
ent watershed with an added storage capacity of 60 , 000,000 
gallons would increase our present supply about 100,000 
gallons per day. At the time we have reached the capacity 
of our present source this would extend our period of 
safety about two years, if no increase in the per capita con¬ 
sumption were encountered. Owing to the fact that the 
pond has already from 50 , 000,000 to 60 , 000,000 gallons 
stored we might be able to extend the period to four years, 
but we should be out of water the year after, and it would 
be necessary to have another supply ready at that time. 

A rough estimate of the cost of this project, made by 
myself in 1897 , was $ 40 , 000 . Levels on various portions of 
the watershed show that no increased storage of value could 
be obtained in the vicinity, although the pond itself might 
be raised, giving a slight increase of storage with no in¬ 
crease of watershed, but the pond would not half fill in a 
dry year with its present storage. I shall ask you to go 
over this watershed carefully and satisfy yourself as to 



34 


whether there is any probability that this pond has any 
source of supply extraneous from its own watershed, as this 
source has been quite prominently mentioned on account 
of its height, low cost, and the belief in the existence of 
springs which would give a large supply. My own obser¬ 
vation leads me to believe that the amount flowing from it 
is insignificant for our purpose. 

Beaver Brook. 

Most of the water in the tributaries of this brook is of 
^excellent appearance, and several of the springs supplying 
the city with water are located upon the shed. There is 
one cedar swamp of considerable area upon it, and this 
undoubtedly gives it the high color shown in the samples 
sent you. There are also 162 houses and 100 stables upon 
it, as well as two large piggeries. The color of this water, 
as shown by samples taken early in April, was 2.32 at the 
outlet of the cedar swamp and 0.86 (platinum standard) 
at East Ashland Street. Its analysis is as follows, from 
sample taken in June. 


Date. 

Appearance. 

Residue 
on evap¬ 
oration. 

Ammonia. 

Chlorine. 

Nitrogen as 

Oxygen consumed. 

Free. 

Albuminoid. 

Ni¬ 

trates. 

Ni¬ 

trites. 

Sedi¬ 

ment 

Color 

(Nessler) 

Total. 

Loss on 
Ignition. 

Total. 

Dis¬ 

solved. 

Sus¬ 

pended. 

Ju’e 21. 

1901. 

Very 

slight. 

4.20 

7.40 

5.00 

.0024 

.0550 

.0530 

.0020 

.42 

.0086 

.0000 

2.26 


Beaver Brook presents several methods of treatment_a 

dam at elevation 140 ; a dam at elevation 155 ; a subdivision 
of the watershed with a dam at elevation 155 ; and filtration 


























Plan 

showing reservoir -formed by dam 
&EAVE& (ROOK, 
below East - Ashland 5t, ah elevation 





36 


in connection with any of them to avoid the expense o£ 
stripping. 

Beaver Brook, at a point just south of Ashland Street, 
which seems to present the most favorable site for a dam, 
being preferred to a location just south of it and nearer 
Court Street, on account of the decreased expense of grad¬ 
ing East Ashland Street, has a watershed of 5.8 square 
miles, and at elevation 140 would flow 387 acres; at eleva¬ 
tion 155 it would flow 750 acres, and would give an ex¬ 
treme daily capacity in a dry year of 4 , 000,000 gallons and 
5 , 200,000 gallons per day respectively, by drawing the 
water entirely out and leaving it for several years below 
high water in the case of the latter. The storage capaci¬ 
ties to these elevations would be 1 , 500 , 000,000 gallons and 
4 , 356 , 000,000 gallons respectively, including stripping. The 
greatest depth in the former would be 20 feet, and in the 
latter 35 feet. 

In addition to a mill at the upper end of Cleaveland’s 
Pond, which would have to be abandoned, there are only 
two mills in operation between this location and E. Taun¬ 
ton, although there are several abandoned water privileges. 

My estimates of the costs of these projects are $ 1 , 350,000 
and $ 1 , 080,000 respectively. 

By leaving the mud which runs over two feet in depth, 
and filling over with one foot of clean sand, the costs of 
these projects might be reduced to $ 1 , 050,000 and $ 780,000 
respectively. 


Cleveland’s Pond. 

On account of the depth of the mud and the immense 
cost of stripping the Beaver Brook Basin at East Ashland 
St., I have considered the construction of a reservoir above 
this point, materially decreasing the watershed. 



Man 

ihovmf resaw -formed if elevation 155 
by a dan at 

(levelahd'5 

near present 


Total Water surface Z34- Acres. Total Watershed 3.8 5<j. Hiles^ 



38 


A favorable point was found about 200 feet north of the- 
old dam at Cleayeland’s Pond. By raising the water to 
elevation 155 a reservoir of 250 acres w’ould be formed,, 
having a watershed of 3.8 square miles and a storage ca¬ 
pacity of 900 million gallons, of which 800 million would 
be available and would give a daily supply of about 2 , 700 ,- 
000 gallons if it were stripped, thus giving some extra, 
depth, and counting on drawing it down to elevation 140 ; 
or, if we did not draw it quite so near the bottom, 2 , 500 , 000 ^ 
gallons per day. The population upon this watershed 
would be nearly as great as upon the lower one, and would 
be about 170 to the square mile. It would be necessary to* 
buy out the sawmill at its north end, and the other mill 
damages would be the same as in the case of the Lower 
Beaver Brook project. 

The cost is estimated at $ 392 , 000 , which might be re¬ 
duced to about $ 350,000 by filling sand over the deepest 
mud if considered advisable, although this would somewhat 
reduce the storage capacity, and as the general depth of 
the mud below the surface is only about 18 feet, it would 
perhaps be best to remove it. 



39 


TABLE SHOWING THE EFFECT OF AN AVERAGE 
DAILY CONSUMPTION OF 2,700.000 GALLONS UPON 
THE UPPER RESERVOIR AT CLEVELAND’S POND 
AT ELEVATION 155, USING THE MONTHLY RATIOS 
OF CONSUMPTION AS SHOWN BY THE PUMPING 
RECORDS OF 1894 AND 1895, AND THE RAINFALL 
AND COLLECTION FROM THE SUDBURY RIVER 
RECORDS OF 1882 AND 1883, MAKING THE NECES¬ 
SARY CORRECTIONS FOR DIFFERENCES IN PER 
CENT OF WATER SURFACES. 


MONTH. 

Gallons 

collected. 

Evaporation 
in excess of 
flow. 

Consumption. 

Total deficit 
at 

end of month. 

Feet 

below 

high 

water- 

June, 

37,003,936 


104,953,450 

67,949,514 


July 


11,310,255 

124,580,894 

203,810,663 


August, 


11,821,591 

104,296,464 

319,958,718 


Sept. 

47,200,866 


90,417,643 

363,175,695 


October, 

29,326,166 


79,987,997 

413,837.536 


Nov. 

19,429,214 


73,336,018 

467,744,340 


Dec. 

38,070,784 


83,765,664 

518.439,220 


Jan. 

42,636,653 


71,118,691 

541,921,258 

8.4r 

Feb. 

112,986,131 


71,036,568 

499,971,695 


March 

181,926,449 


77,277,931 

395,323,177 


April 

143,339,041 


77,195,808 

329,179,944 


May, 

105,020,790 


96,987,499 

321,146,653 

4.0 

June, 

19,783,975 


127,208,837 

428,571,515 


July, 

2,111,857 


115,136,726 

541,596,384 


August, 


4,765,787 

91,320,998 

637,683,169 


Sept. 

3,148,053 


71,611,430 

706,146,546 


October, 

23,920,768 


64,959,451 

747,185,229 


Nov. 

22,477,078 


56,993,501 

761,701,652 


Dec. 

24,875,072 


64,630,958 

801,457,538 

15.0 













40 


Silver Lake. 

Silver Lake and its watershed were surveyed with un¬ 
usual care in 1897 , and the investigations in that vicinity 
were made with almost the precision necessary for final 
rather than preliminary work, so far as the watershed and 
storage were concerned. It is distant from Brockton City 
Hall, in a straight line, 11 y 2 miles. It is 640 acres in area, 
and has a maximum depth of 70 fe'et; its elevation above 
city base is 50 feet, and its total watershed is 4.4 square 
miles. Its shores are sandy and soundings show no mud 
of any consequence within 25 feet of the surface. The total 
population on the watershed in 1897 was 50 , or 18 to the 
square mile. Below the outlet I have found four dams with 
six mills having wheels; all but one of these are situated 
below the confluence of other streams, and the Silver Lake 
watershed forms from 21 per cent, to 44 per cent, of their 
entire watershed. 


The area and storage capacity of the lake 

for each suc- 

cessive five feet is as follows : 

DEPTH. 

At high water,- 

Area. 

644 acres. 

Storage capac¬ 
ity, gallons. 

5,371,361,000 

5 feet below high water, 

538 

i ( 

4,370,334,000 

10 “ “ “ “ 

414 

a 

3,562,659,000 

15 “ “ “ “ 

372 

u 

2.902,487,000 

20 “ “ “ “ 

337 

ti 

2,312,314,000 

25 “ “ “ “ 

286 

a 

1,801,163,000 

30 “ “ “ “ 

238 

u 

1,352,906,000 

40 “ << << 

120 

(( 

606,471,000 

50 “ “ “ “ 

64 

a 

198,215,000 

00 “ “ “ “ 

21 

a 

37,305,000 

70 “ “ “ 

2 

Ui 










42 


FOLLOWING IS A TABLE SHOWING THE AVERAGE 
ANALYSIS OF THE WATER OF SILVER LAKE 
FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS: 


Year. 

(H 

O 

O 

U 

Residue 
on evapo¬ 
ration. 

Ammonia. 

Chlorine. 

Nitrogen as 

Oxygen Consumed. 

Hardness. 

Iron. 

Free. 

Albuminoid. 

Nitrates. 

Nitrites. 

Total. 

Loss by 
Ignition. 

Total. 1 

Dissolved. 

Sus¬ 

pended. 

1898 

.16 

2.99 

1.20 

.0005 

.0141 

.0117 

.0024 

.63 

.0008 

.0000 

.28 

.7 

.0039 

1899 

.13 

3.02 

1.15 

.0007 

.0128 

.0119 

.0009 

.63 

.0020 

.0000 

.28 

.4 

.0032 

1900 

.09 

2.80 

.89 

.0007 

.0123 

.0112 

.0011 

.64 

.0020 

.0000 

.25 

.3 

.... 


On account of its immense storage capacity it is obvious 
that the date at which we reach the amount of consumption 
which the watershed would supply continuously is not the 
date nor the consumption which the Lake is capable of 
supplying. In order that it should retain its size and Con¬ 
tinue to furnish excellent water, I have assumed that it 
should never be drawn down more than 16 feet. Assuming 
that the next quarter of a century will have the same rain¬ 
fall as the twenty-five years just passed, and basing our col¬ 
lection on the Sudbury River records, the following dia¬ 
gram shows that the Lake would furnish us until the com¬ 
bined consumption of Brockton and Whitman is over 
5,000,000 gallons, without drawing the water down over 16 
feet, or till about 1930. The length of this period warrants 
the assumption that the next similar one will not be materi¬ 
ally different, although the sequence of the dry seasons may¬ 
be materially changed. 
































^ o cp ^ ^ rv) 


« 


Gallons 

mm 

mm 

2J23M 
*326,296 
W 0.900 g 

mm If 
ti^et s 

1791,656 g. 
29I5.M4 ^ 

5042,000 | 

1186,671 § 
3133.6K = 

m® 5 

3.6H512 f 
3,188,400 ~ 

mmZ 

4.113,808 § 
4183,2081 

'mm§ 

46351400 f 

4811,816 

4012,384 

$Z20,904 

1+D r 576 

4625,000 



1306=1315 

1308=1877 

1310=1813 

I9IH88I 

1914=1881 

1916=1885 

1318=1881 

1910=1889 

1312=18)1 

1324=183) 

1916=1835 

1918*1811 

1130=1893 




feet below Hl|h Voter. 


I 




































































44 


At the end of this period some additional supply would 
be required, and Silver Lake would be capable of supplying 
us continuously with about 4 , 000,000 gallons per day, if it 
were deemed advisable to draw the Lake down to a depth 
of 20 feet, but if we should not desire to lower it this 
amount the following diagram shows the effect of a con¬ 
tinuous draught of 3 , 500,000 gallons per day. At this time 
we should have the present source of supply as an auxiliary 
without extra expense, and its capacity would be very 
greatly augmented, as we would then have use for the large 
amount now going to waste in the winter and spring. 
While it is a grave question whether public opinion would 
sanction the use of a poorer water, still it seems only fair 
that this source should be considered as an auxiliary to 
Silver Lake for quantity as well as to the proposed lower 
basin. At this time, if it were deemed advisable, it might 
be used in connection with filtration. I attach no great 
comparative importance to the fact that Silver Lake has 
large tributary watersheds (plans and capacities of which I 
shall furnish you), which may be more or less cheaply con¬ 
nected with it, and that the other sources have not. While 
this at first thought might seem to be an illogical conclu¬ 
sion, yet it must be borne in mind that at the time we have 
reached the consumption outlined any force main and 
pumps which will economically perform our work now and 
for the ensuing period must be added to and remodelled, 
or partially replaced, at an expense in conjunction with 
securing the addition which would equal the original ex¬ 
pense of going to. Silver Lake. For this reason I have 
assumed that the fact that the other sources considered may 
not be readily added to in their vicinity is nothing against 
them, as Silver Lake would then be an auxiliary to them, 
.and a better quality of water than could be obtained from 


45 


the Silver Lake auxiliaries and at substantially the same 
cost. 

Feet Mow Hip 

BOMflS 
I5J8-I877 
1510=1875 
1512=1881 
1514* 1883 
1516= HISS’ 
1518=1887 
1520=1885 
1522=1837 
1524=1855 
1324*7835 
1528=1857 
1850 = 1855 



^ pt 


~ ^ N 



















































































46 


The estimated cost of the Silver Lake project is $ 485 , 000 . 
It seems fair to assume that Whitman will pay a' portion of 
this amount, either directly or indirectly. 

On account of the different periods for which the various 
sources are good, the difference in the quality of the water, 
and the difference in the heights to which it must be 
pumped, it is difficult to make a comparison of cost which 
will be fair to each. I have, however, assumed that any 
project which is adopted should be paid for at the time at 
which it is estimated it will be exhausted. On this basis, 
estimating our interest at three and a half per cent., our 
sinking fund at three and a quarter per cent., and our coal 
at $ 5.00 per ton, I have compiled the following table show¬ 
ing the yearly cost of the different projects—for interest, 
sinking fund, and coal, and not including a new storage 
reservoir. 

It will be observed, however, that the present source has 
been added to the additional basin on Salisbury Brook, and 
to none of the others, which would in every case have the 
present source as an auxiliary without any expense at the 
end of their respective periods. 




YEARLY EXPENDITURE FOR SINKING FUND, INTEREST AND COAL 
FOR THE DIFFERENT SYSTEMS, EXCLUSIVE OF A STORAGE RES¬ 
ERVOIR, ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT EACH WILL BE PAID FOR 
WHEN EXHAUSTED. 



Beaver Brook, 
(elev. 155.) 
First Cost, 

SI ,050.000. 

Beaver Brook, 
(elev. 140 ) 
First Cost, 
$780,000. 

Silver Lake. 
First Cost 
$485,000. 

Lower Basin 
(Salisbury 

Brook,) 
First Cost, 
$406,000. 

Cleveland's 

Pond. 
First Cost 
$392,000, 

1903 

$59,197 

$49,258 

$33,129 

$38,228 

$39,686 

1904 

59,274 

49,335 

33,327 

38,268 

39,763 

1905 

59,344 

49,405 

33,513 

38,306 

39,833 

1906 

59,418 

49,479 

33,699 

38,343 

39,907 

1907 

59,491 

49,552 

33,891 

38,381 

39,980 

1908 

59,569 

49,630 

34,095 

38,422 

40,058 

1909 

59,637 

49,698 

34,275 

38,458 

40,126 

1910 

56,710 

49,771 

34,467 

38,496 

40,199 

1911 

59,797 

49,858 

34,689 

38,541 

40,286 

1912 

59,889 

49,950 

34,929 

38,589 

40,378 

1913 

59,970 

50,031 

35.145 

38,631 

40,459 

1914 

60,057 

50,118 

35,367 

38,676 

40,546 

1915 

60,143 

50,204 

35,595 

38,722 

40,632 

1916 

60,254 

50,315 

35,883 

38,779 


1917 

60,352 

50,413 

36,141 



1918 

60,457 

50,518 

’ 36,411 



1919 

60,562 

50,623 

36,687 



1920 

60,674 

50,735 

36,975 



1921 

60,782 

50,843 

37,263 



1922 

60,898 

50,959 

37,563 



1923 

61,014 

51,075 

37.869 



1924 

61,139 

51,200 

38,193 



1925 

61,246 

51,307 

38,535 



1926 

61,379 

51,440 

38,817 



1927 

61,510 

51.571 

39,159 



1928 

61.652 





1929 

61,774 





1930 

61,908 





1931 

62.055 





1932 

62,213 






















48 


As before, stated, I have not at this time given the sub¬ 
ject of a distributing reservoir careful consideration, so far 
as its exact size and location are concerned, except to say 
that in any case the expense of building it and connecting 
with it would not be very materially different with any of 
the projects. If constructed at the location which has been 
proposed, the Cleaveland Pond project would need no extra 
pipe for connection, and the Silver Lake project would 
have the additional advantage over the Cleaveland Pond 
and Salisbury Brook projects of having a main the entire 
length of Quincy Street and in Crescent Street from the 
Whitman line to Quincy Street; and over the Lower 
Beaver Brook basin of a main in the portion of Quincy 
Street between Crescent Street and East Ashland Street, 
and Crescent Street from the Whitman line to Quincy 
Street, as against a main in East Ashland from Beaver 
Brook to Quincy Street. 

I estimate that any distributing reservoir that will be 
required will not exceed $ 125,000 in cost, and that sum 
may therefore be added to the above estimate to obtain the 
total estimated cost of connecting the various sources with 
the city, should a reservoir be deemed necessary at this 
time. 

Other Sources. 

It being apparent that either Beaver Brook or Silver 
Lake, in conjunction with the present reservoir, will supply 
the city to any future period to which it is reasonable for us 
to estimate, I have not given the matter of'mere excess of 
quantity any great weight in my consideration of other 
sources, unless they could be secured at a small increase of 
cost. Many other places besides those mentioned here have 
been examined to an extent sufficient to prove they were 
not equal to those mentioned. 




49 


North River. 

An admirable situation for a dam exists on the North 
River near Hanover Four Corners^ the watershed at that 
point being about 45 square miles, insuring a perennial 
supply of water so far as this city is concerned. Levels in 
the vicinity show, however, that a dam at this point if raised 
to elevation 25 would entirely destroy the water power of 
the rubber works at Hanover, and would probably necessi¬ 
tate a relocation of the entire works; would flow several 
highways to a considerable depth, and a very large area to 
a depth of from 12 to 15 feet. As this dam is 10.2 miles 
from the centre of the city, and the pumping some 25 feet 
higher, it would cost practically the same as Silver Lake 
for a force main, pumps, and pumping, and we should have 
the additional cost of the dam, the land for the reservoir, 
the construction of several town ways, and the stripping,, 
and it is not likely that the water would be as good. 

On the other hand, we should, have a large quantity of 
water for which there is no probability we shall have use 
within any time to which we shall be justified in looking 
forward. I have not further investigated this source. 
There is no nearer source on the same stream which gives 
promise of being cheaper or of better quality than Beaver 
Brook. 

NIPPENICKET POND. 

Nippenicket Pond drains an immense cedar swamp area, 
is very shallow, and the water would have to be pumped 
practically as high as from Silver Lake. While the expense 
would be somewhat reduced, as it is only about seven and 
a half miles from the centre of the city, although nearly as 
far from the proposed storage reservoir as Silver Lake is,, 
the quality puts it out of the question. 


50 


NORTON RESERVOIR. 

Norton Reservoir would apparently cost nearly as much 
as Silver Lake, without considering the quality at all; there 
being every indication, however, that it would be inferior 
on account of shallow flowage. It takes almost the entire 
drainage of the villages of Mansfield and Foxboro. 

NEPONSET RESERVOIR. 

Neponset Reservoir is about the same distance from the 
city as Silver Lake. On account of its height (elevation 
270) the water would not be pumped so high, but pumps 
would undoubtedly be necessary notwithstanding its height. 
The quality would not be comparable and the quantity less, 
the total watershed being only about 3.2 square miles. 

COWEESET BROOK. 

Coweeset Brook. I have also examined the watershed 
of Coweeset Brook, just west of Brockton Heights. The 
amount of water to be obtained here would be almost pre¬ 
cisely the same as at Cleaveland’s Pond; the height to be 
pumped would not differ materially; and for other reasons 
it would appear to me to be somewhat more expensive, and 
it is not so near a favorable site for a storage reservoir. 
The pollution also would appear to be more imminent. I 
have considered, therefore, that for the purposes of this 
comparison it need not be further considered. 

GREAT POND, WEYMOUTII. 

Great Pond, Weymouth, as given by the State Board of 
Health report for 1898, has a watershed of 2.8 square miles, 
which is materially larger than was thought to be the case 
when the question was considered in 1897; but, as the town 



51 


of Weymouth, having a population by the last census of 
10,000, already takes its water from there, I see no reason 
to believe that as large a supply could be obtained there so 
cheaply as from Great Pond in Randolph, in case a right 
could be secured there at all. 

GREAT POND, RANDOLPH. 

Great Pond, Randolph, is situated about five and a half 
miles from the upper end of the present reservoir, about six 
and a half miles from the standpipe, and eight miles from 
the centre of the city. It now supplies the towns of Ran¬ 
dolph and Holbrook, and the town of Braintree has a right 
to take water from it, but has not yet done so. It has an 
area of 130 acres, is 22 feet deep at its deepest point, and 
has a general depth of 11 feet. Its drainage area is 3.44 
square miles, and it is capable of furnishing a daily supply 
in a dry year of about two million gallons. Its quality is 
similar to our present source. Its elevation is about 120 
feet above mean tide water. The town? of Randolph and 
Holbrook have an average daily consumption of 232,000 
gallons; their greatest daily average for any one month in 
1900 was 455,000, and the greatest pumping for any one 
day 849,900 gallons. The water is pumped into the Ran¬ 
dolph standpipe, which is 125 feet high, 30 feet in diameter, 
and 243 feet above the level of the pond, through a 14-inch 
force main, and from there it flows to the Holbrook stand¬ 
pipe at the same height. The distance to the Randolph 
standpipe from the pumping station is aboqt three and a 
half miles, and from our standpipe about 4 eSr miles. It 
does not seem probable that the Legislature would grant 
the right to Brockton to take more than 1,000,000 gallons 
per day from this pond, especially if Braintree proposes to 


52 


use her right there, and possibly we should not be allowed 
to take water there under any circumstances. 

As the present source will be capable of supplying us for 
some years yet, except in a dry year, it might be possible 
to make some arrangement by which the towns of Ran¬ 
dolph and Holbrook could tide us over with their present 
pumping plant, which consists of one 1,500,000 gallon and 
one 2,500,000 gallon pump. I consider that it would be 
impossible to use these pumps in conjunction, on account 
of the excessive friction head, and that their limit of supply 
would be substantially 2,500,000 gallons per 24 hours. As 
our greatest average consumption for a month will soon 
approximate 2,000,000 gallons per 24 hours, and our larg¬ 
est day has already reached 2,300,000 gallons, while theirs 
was 849,900, it is obvious that it would be necessary for us 
to commence using from them some time before our own 
supply was exhausted. This might, however, be done for 
a few years if considered expedient. It would be necessary, 
however, to pump almost continuously, as their standpipe 
is about 100 feet higher than ours and would be rapidly 
drained below a safe pressure for them. It would be nec¬ 
essary to construct a 14-inch force main between the stand- 
pipes; this would cost about $40,000. I am informed that 
the average duty of their pumps, for all purposes, is about 
40,000,000. 

Massapoag Lake. 

Massapoag Lake is situated about eight miles from the 
centre of the city. It is occupied by a ledge of iron ore and 
is reported to contain large quantities of iron. From sam¬ 
ples taken by myself in June I find that while there is sev¬ 
eral times as much as at Silver Lake, at that time of the 


53 


year it was not dangerous in quantity, as shown by the fol¬ 
lowing analyses. 

(Average of four samples.) 



The area of the Lake is 320 acres, and its watershed is 
from 3.5 to 3.8 square miles. From my own soundings I 
find depths of over 40 feet, and a depth of 15 feet will usu¬ 
ally be found at 400 feet from the shores, a usual depth in 
the middle being about 21 to 24 feet. 

It seems probable that about 2,800,000 gallons a day 
might be secured from this source in case permission could 
be obtained from the Legislature to draw it down 15 feet. 
O11 account of its height (according to the State topograph¬ 
ical map), it would be possible to drain it into our present 
watershed without pumping, by means of a conduit empty¬ 
ing into the ditch leading to our reservoir. This conduit 
would be from 6.5 to 7 miles in length, and basing our esti¬ 
mate of cost on the Silver Lake project, would cost about 
$160,000. 

The Lake can be drawn down about 6 feet, which is usu¬ 
ally done to feed the many mill privileges below it. There 
are at least nineteen mill privileges having wheels (which 
have heads varying from 5 to 24 feet) upon the stream run¬ 
ning from the Lake, the aggregate head being about 200 
feet. 























54 


I submit the above information, believing that in com¬ 
bination with the plans on file in this office, and the large 
fund of information in your own, you will be enabled to 
form an intelligent and positive opinion as to the best avail¬ 
able source of water supply for this city. 

Yours respectfully, 

CHAS. R. FELTON, 

j . A 4 j. City Engineer. 


REPORT OF DESMOND FITZGERALD. 


Boston, July 15, 1901. 
Charles R. Felton, Esq., City Engineer, Brockton, Mass. 

Dear Sir:—As requested in your report of June 1st, 
1901, I have given “careful consideration to the data” 
which you have furnished me, in connection with the sub¬ 
ject of an additional water supply for the city of Brockton, 
and after many examinations on the ground of the various 
sources which have been suggested and “checking the esti¬ 
mates,” I send you herewith a brief report embodying my 
“recommendations of the source best adapted in my judg¬ 
ment to serve the city’s present and future needs,” with 
my “reasons therefor.” 

Present Supply. 

The city of Brockton has practically already outgrown 
its present source of supply as now developed upon Salis¬ 
bury brook. Your tables and computations have made 
this so apparent that it seems hardly worth while for me to 
attempt to add to the discussion. It is, of course, true that 
in an average year there is a surplus, but the proper stand¬ 
ard by which to measure the capacity of a supply is the 



56 


amount it will safely furnish in the longest period of ex¬ 
cessive drought which is likely to occur. Judged by this 
standard your present storage, is in danger of being drawn 
so low as to imperil the quality of the water delivered, and 
in the near future there is a possibility of the city finding 
itself without any water., irrespective of the question of 
quality. A few words are perhaps necessary to make my 
meaning clear. The water in Salisbury brook, before un¬ 
dergoing the changes due to storage, is unfit for domestic 
purposes. The longer such a water is held in store in a well- 
built reservoir, the better its quality becomes. At the end 
of a long dry period there should still be enough water left 
in the reservoir to delay the entrance of the brook water 
into the distribution system. There are probably not far 
from 42,000 people in Brockton, and with a consumption 
per capita of 30 gallons daily, the reservoir would be drawn 
down in a maximum period of drought to a dangerously 
low level. It is, I believe, fully conceded by all who are 
familiar with the situation, that Brockton must provide 
itself at once with additional water. 

Sources Selected for Consideration in this Report. 

A number of sources have been examined, but the three 
which have been finally selected as the best practicable 
sources for careful consideration by the citizens of Brock¬ 
ton are—Salisbury and Beaver brooks and Silver lake. The 
Metropolitan Water Supply has been classified among the 
impracticable sources, but not until after proper study and 
consultation. 

Salisbury Brook. 

In my opinion, the cheapest and best plan for a further 
development of Salisbury brook is by an additional storage 


57 


reservoir below the present dam, as planned in your studies, 
which will, in round numbers, double the present daily 
supply. The building of such a reservoir in the manner 
proposed will improve the quality of the supply. The first 
cost will be about $288,000 per million gallons daily, and 
if the present supply be included the city would have to 
seek an additional source at the end of about fourteen 
years. The quality of the water, judged by a high stand¬ 
ard, would still be somewhat objectionable both as to color 
and the amount of vegetable matter it will contain, but one 
of the principal objections is that the water provided by 
ibis expenditure would be of little use at the end of a few 
years when an additional supply will become necessary and 
when one of better quality will probably be selected. 

York Pend. 

The watershed of this pond is too small to be of any ma¬ 
terial value to the city of Brockton in any serious consid¬ 
eration of an additional supply. The area of the watershed 
is 0.125 of a square mile, and there is no practical way to 
increase this area. The capacity of the pond is 60,000,000 
gallons, which, taken in connection with its watershed, 
would give an addition to Brockton’s resources of only 
about 100,000 gallons daily, on account of the long period 
required to fill the reservoir from such a small watershed, 
when the storage is once exhausted. This supply would, 
by your estimate, cost about $40,000 for 100,000 gallons of 
daily delivery. To compare with the other sources on the 
same basis this would amount to $400,000 per million gal¬ 
lons daily. The time when an additional supply would be 
necessary would be postponed only three or four years by 
the addition of this pond to the Brockton system. I have 
given much more consideration to this source than I other- 


58 


wise should have done, because it has been discussed as 
being of some possible value to the city. 

Beaver Brook. 

This brook would, I believe, in default of a better source, 
give Brockton a valuable water supply. Above the pro¬ 
posed lower dam the area of the watershed is 5.8 square 
miles, and a reservoir of very large capacity is practicable, 
which would give a safe daily supply of very nearly 4,000,- 
000 gallons. Owing to the high color of the water and the 
presence of 162 houses upon the watershed, I should not 
recommend the building of a small reservoir upon this 
brook or even one of moderate capacity. The water should 
be kept in store for several months. 

As the reservoir is not at a sufficient elevation to furnish, 
a supply by gravity it will be necessary to pump the water. 
The first cost per million gallons delivered would be about: 
$280,000, and, on the basis of consumption contained in 
the tables, it would last Brockton until 1925, without in¬ 
cluding the present supply. I approve of the methods which 
you have adopted in developing Beaver brook, and believe 
there is no cheaper way to provide water of proper quality 
and quantity from this source. The large cost of construc¬ 
tion is the principal objection to this scheme. 

Ground Water Supply and Filtration. 

We have, a number of times, discussed the question of 
the feasibility of procuring a supply of ground water for the 
city of Brockton. A supply of good ground water suffi¬ 
ciently ample for the future requirements of the city, and 
one which it would be advisable to develop, does not seem 
to exist within a reasonable distance of the city. 

In regard to the subject of filtration, I find that it wilt 


59 


not be advantageous for Brockton to select an inferior 
water and adopt a filtration system, and I consider filtra¬ 
tion in connection with Silver Lake water unnecessary. 

Silver Lake. 

This lake has an area of water surface of one square mile 
and a watershed, including the pond, of 4.4 square miles. 
The population is but 18 to the square mile. The lake is 
about twelve miles from Brockton. Its maximum depth is 
seventy feet and it holds more than 5,000,000,000 gallons. 
On account of its great storage capacity the quality of the 
water’is most excellent. I estimate that it will furnish 
safely about 4,000,000 gallons daily without drawing the 
lake so low as to change materially the quality of the water, 
and that it will last the city for the same period as Beaver 
brook. The supply may be increased by turning water into 
the lake which now flows in other directions. 

The first cost to the city of Brockton of a supply from 
Silver Lake will probably be not far from $110,000 per mil¬ 
lion gallons delivered daily. The low cost, compared with 
other sources, arises from the fact that nothing has to be 
done in the way of constructing a storage reservoir. Na¬ 
ture has already provided one of ample capacity. 

As the supply from the three important sources consid¬ 
ered in this, report must be raised by pumping, it is import¬ 
ant to know the comparative cost including pumping. The 
heights to which the water has to be raised differs in each 
of the plans, and in the case of Silver Lake the length of 
the force main adds a large element of frictional resistance 
and consequent coal consumption. The fairest way to pre¬ 
sent a comparison is on the basis of the cost per million 
gallons delivered into the present standpipe, including the 
cost of construction and the cost of pumping. 


60 


The cost of water may be estimated from several points 
*of view. In the following table I have endeavored to show 
the cost per million gallons actually consumed on the basis 
of charging both the principal and interest of the cost of 
-construction and also charging only the interest. Under 
the first assumption I have assumed that all of the supplies 
will be of no value when the consumption of water in 
Brockton exceeds the safe amount which they will be able 
to furnish, and in making the computation I have charged 
all the water which will be used during the life of the re¬ 
spective supplies with the total cost and compound interest, 
and to this have added the cost of the coal for pumping, 
as the heights to which the water is to be raised in the dif¬ 
ferent plans enters into the problem. Under the second 
assumption I have only charged the water consumed with 
the value of the use of the money during the life of the 
works, on the ground that the water will still remain at the 
ends of the respective periods, and will represent at least as 
much money value as at present. To this has been added 
the cost of coal for pumping, as in the first case. 


Cost par million gallons delivered in standpipe. 



Cost per million gallons. 

SOURCE 

Col. 1. 

Col. 2 


Principal and interest. 

Interest alone. 

tSalisburv Brook.. 

$59.80 

$23.16 

Beaver Brook. 

109.38 

62 26 

Silver Lake. 

46. 97 

28 49 


It will be seen by an examination of Column 2, in the 
foregoing table, that the cost of delivering water into the 
.standpipe is about the same in the case of the Salisbury 










61 


brook and the Silver lake projects, irrespective of the 
questions of the duration of the supply and quality of the 
water. If these considerations be weighed there is no doubt 
but that the Silver lake project stands easily first. In re¬ 
gard to the question of quality, it is difficult to exaggerate 
the superiority of the lake water from this important point 
of view, both as affecting the comfort and health of the 
people. If an arrangement be made to supply other com¬ 
munities with water, as seems probable if the needs of 
Whitman be considered, it can be done with more cer¬ 
tainty and under more favorable terms if the quality of the 
water is assured. 

I unhesitatingly recommend Silver lake as the best 
source for Brockton’s future water supply, and my reasons 
are—first, that the quality of the water is entirely satisfac¬ 
tory; second, it may be regarded as a permanent source of 
supply; and, third, taking everything into consideration it 
is the cheapest of the available sources. It is my belief, 
founded on a most careful study of the subject, that after 
Brockton has once had this water in its distribution system, 
it will never use any of its present supply except under 
necessity arising from some unusual accident, and that the 
reputation and health of the city will be promoted in a 
larger degree by the early adoption of this source of water 
supply than by an equal investment in any other direction.- 
Very truly yours, 

DESMOND FITZGERALD, 

Consulting Engineer.. 















• m 

- 

















- 

































